• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
7

Slide show is not showing the right orientation

Explorer ,
Nov 20, 2023 Nov 20, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi, I did some reproductions of 35mm slides in CR2 format. Some of the slides were flipped so I used Camera Raw to flip them back. In the Bridge Film Strip and Preview they are fine, but when I view them in Slide Show, they are in the old orientation. Very strange: I look at one file in Bridge, and when I hit Ctrl+L for Slide Show, it is the other way around..... I cleared all the cache I could get my fingers on, but it still displays the wrong way around in Slide Show.

Any ideas?

TOPICS
How to , Problem or error

Views

207

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Nov 21, 2023 Nov 21, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi, @thijswolzak2, yeah, I have an idea: you found a bug. 

 

I followed your suggestions and it did what you said it did. I really expected the purging of the cache to "fix" it but, as it did with you, it did not fix it.

 

I'll see that someone in Adobe adds this to their list.

 

On a separate note, how did you capture your slides? Several years ago I had just under 10k slides that I needed to digitize. I ended up writing my process in this blog: 

https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-community-professionals/digitizing-your-slides-by-photography/t...

 

Since you're already done (?), it will probably not affect you, but I am curious as to how you did it.

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Nov 21, 2023 Nov 21, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Gary, it makes me so proud that I found an official bug. Will it carry my name, like newly discovered planets?

 

About the slide digitisation: I havent read your blog yet entirely, but I did use a dslr with a macro lens. Scanning is obsolete for this kind of jobs, it just takes too long and you dont get RAW files! I will read your blog later.

 

You are not an Adobe employee I understand, but sort of a gateway to Adobe for this forum? I did see a lot of your posts earlier. Any idea when this will be rsolved?

I use slideshow a lot to select images. When I go through images in preview, it takes like 0.5s for the preview to get highres, and that is just too long for a good workflow. In slideshow there is no delay. Would you know how to tackle the delay in Preview? I would prefer working with preview because I can see information like exposure on the thumbnail. I have a i9 PC with a GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, which is not new but should be sufficient for a normal workflow?

 

Best regards, Thijs

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Nov 21, 2023 Nov 21, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Ha ha! Nope, there's no such identification for these kinds of things. Maybe there should be.  As far as when it might be resolved, that depends on how difficult it is to fix. That's something that I have no clue about. [I did take a class in basic about 40 years ago, and I've not done any programming since! :>)] But fixing bugs does have a triage like hospitals; crashes, like heart attacks and gunshots, get higher priority while cuts (that are not bleeding profusely) are much lower down the pecking order. Also, easy fixes that are not likely to cause damage elsewhere are more likely to be fixed than if you do this "one simple thing" that causes everything to fall down. So, the quick answer is I do not have a clue, hopefully soon. It has been reported to the high authorities. 

 

Whenever I do scanning, I always try and start with something with text or a known issue (is the right-handed person wearing their watch on the right hand (then oops!). That way, I can set all subsequent images with the same side of the slide or negative facing up.

 

What I found with photographing slides as opposed to scanning is that photographing slides is significantly faster, and scanning slides gives you significantly better quality. When I started out digitizing my "just under" 10,000 slides, there was no way I could do all that in my lifetime; it just takes too long. But I also know that not every one of my slides was outstanding (yes, hard to believe, but true). So, as I occasionally go through the digitized slides, if I find any that could benefit from a proper scan, I do that scan.

 

As far as your wish to work with DNGs, do understand that if you take a 12–14 bit image of a slide, it becomes a 12–14 bit digital image of a 6–8-bit slide — and no more. If you take your camera and photograph a white sheet of paper, that image has that shade of white — period. To try and increase the dynamic range of an image, I've tried to use SilverFast's double-scanning approach, but I've yet to see any significant beneficial result. Also, while I did not mention it specifically, I did photograph my images in DNG (that's all I ever have my camera set to shoot), but still, if I wanted the best quality image, I had to scan the slide because scanners capture a greater Dynamic range than cameras can (but fewer f-stops). Nonetheless, while a JPG image has more dynamic range than a slide, I'd still continue to shoot raw because there are other things I can do with that raw image. But expecting a greater dynamic range is not one of them.

 

Consider the following data (from https://www.photoreview.com.au/tips/shooting/dynamic-range-explained/)

 

Below, in the chart, "D" can be defined in several ways:

Dynamic/Density Range (D) = log10 Intensity Range (Lux)
Dynamic/Density Range (D) = Colour Depth (bits) x 0.3 (where 0.3 is log10^2)
Dynamic/Density Range (D) = Exposure Latitude (f-stops) x 0.3
Therefore, Colour Depth (bits) = Exposure Latitude (f-stops)

 

And the following are some use-values of "D," (this is a partial list from the above-cited article).

Photographic Prints

2.0D

Film Negatives (for prints)

2.1D (7 f-stops)

Film Positives (for slides)

3.0D (but only 5 f-stops exposure latitude)

Digital Cameras (prosumer)

2.4D (8 f-stops)

Digital Cameras (professional)

2.7D (9 f-stops)

Camera Scanning Backs

3.6D (12 f-stops)

Flatbed Scanners (CCD)

3.3D

 

So, you can see part of where scanning can achieve a better scan, but again, no better than the original content.

 

Gad, that was a lot more than I planned on writing, I got carried away. This whole thing is very interesting to me.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Nov 24, 2023 Nov 24, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Gary,

a few remarks on repruducing slides with a digital camera instead of scanning, after reading your blog.

- your remark that a slide is only 6-8 bit surprises me, I would think it is analogue, so hard to express in bits. In practice richer than digital images.

- the dynamic range is a limitation of the digital camera, especially Canon. But the controls in Camera Raw (like shadows and clarity) make a big difference. And many slides are either over- or underexposed, and that can be tackled by the exposure of the reproduction. Only perfectly exposed, developed and preserved slides pose a problem. I have not explored HDR possibilities with multiple exposures but I would imagine that would give a lot of options.

- The images you share in your blog at "So how good are the images when photographed?": I prefer the left. It looks much cleaner in color, more detailed, and more saturated. The image on the right has less grain of course, but also less detail, and color noise in dark areas like the hair of the girl.

- the light box. You state that it should not have a color cast. But color casts can be corrected in raw files, you can even make an ICC profile of the lightbox to correct inconsistancies in the spectrum. More important is a good CRI-value, in my idea. For a more important project then the old family holiday slides, I used the lightbox to light a ColorChecker Passport, to capture the color characteristics of its light.

- I am a great fan of Camranger, I use it icw an iPad in location work (mainly architecture, interior, etc , see my website thijswolzak.nl). In this case I use the iPad beside the lightbox, so I have a perfect enlarged live view version of the slide on my iPad screen. I can choose exposure for each individual slide if necessary, so the pros of tethering without the cons. All images are saved on the camera card. The iPad Camranger app also serves as a remote controller.

- I found it key in my photography setup to create a distance between the slide and the lightbox. In my first setup the slides would loose dust and particles onto the lightbox, and that would be visible in the shots. To make sure they are completely out of focus I created appr 4 cm distance between the slide and the lightbox, by cutting 8 pieces of black foamboard and glue them together with double sided tape.

- Grain doesn't bother me that much; the brain ignores it, and if I really want to tackle it I use Topaz DeNoise. Seeing the grain means I see the real thing. I don't like scan software doing sketchy things that cannot be rewound.

Really appreciate your effort to document your process! I never took the time but who knows there is something in my remarks that helps all of us forward!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Nov 21, 2023 Nov 21, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi @thijswolzak2 ,

Thank you for reporting the issue. We’ve this issue in our engineering pipeline.

Regards,
Bridge Team

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Feb 07, 2024 Feb 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hello @thijswolzak2 , 

 

We have released a new Adobe Bridge 2024 Beta build (14.0.2.181) which fixes this issue. We would love for you to try it out and share feedback. 

 

For a complete list of fixed issues, please refer to community post announcement. 

 

Regards, 
Bridge Team 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 07, 2024 Feb 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you Adobe, it's looking good so far!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Feb 23, 2024 Feb 23, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Hello @thijswolzak2 ,  

   

The fix is now available in production released version 14.0.2.191. We would love for you to try it out and share feedback.   

   

For a complete list of fixed issues, please refer https://helpx.adobe.com/bridge/kb/fixed-issues.html 

   

Regards,   
Bridge Team 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines